Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why can't MMOs please everyone?
TheRealBanango
Member UncommonPosts: 89
No this isn't a rhetorical question, but let me explain it before people feel the need to comment with witty remarks, sarcasm, and negativity.
While MMOs cannot please everyone, what is so bad in trying to do so? there has to be a balance in which players will still play the game because they are trading off some preferences with others. Why can't a game be a themepark and a sandbox? Example) A game that is essentially a sandbox, open world, has quest lines that are story based and guide you through content throughout the world, immersing you into its lore and history much like a themepark game. Maybe when you first log in, the game leads you into the more themepark elements, guiding you through the world conflicts, but as you level up you may decide your interests reside somewhere else in the world where you can start playing how you want, building a home, crafting, always having the open world to your disposal.
Why cant combat be action based and tab target? Example) basic combat mechanics work much like chivalry or mount and blade while still having skills and abilities you can progress with such as a shield bash for warrior would be like an AoE cone effect in front of you, mages could have a skill where they press the keybind and click on the ground to shoot up flames while still being able to attack and defend themselves actively with their staves, rogues could have a skill where they press the key and click on an enemy to throw sand in their eyes and blind them, then go in and actually stab the guy. I like the creativity in League of Legends and how their skill system has implemented a variety of ways in which you execute them, sometimes its just press the button, others you have to aim, others you have to press the button then click on the target, others there is even a time in which you have to be in close proximity. This type of creativeness is lacking in MMORPGs.
Although my thoughts aren't very well gathered, I think my point is that developers are stuck in a place where they think there is already a proven recipe for a successful game, and they have been replicating the same recipe and tossing in the same ingredients but hoping for different results every time (madness). It's like if a baker named....Mr. Walter Warcrafter (idk?) made the best selling cherry pie so every other baker is making cherry pies never realizing that the consumers are tired of eating cherry pie, we know there is other types of pies out there, why don't the bakers?
These ideas are very easy to conceptualize and extremely difficult to make work, I understand, but why aren't these questions being asked by major developers, after all they are the ones that realistically can make a difference, have the experience, knowledge, and resources to do so. Film directors don't make films because they want to make money, they make films because they love making films, the money came after the hard work and dedication, why is the game industry so different?
TL;DR
I ask you, Why can't an MMO please everyone who loves this genre? We make trade offs all the time in the real world, Im sure we can make them in a game that's far less serious than life...What are you willing to trade off in return for something to be implemented in a game?
Comments
Well for one a game that takes 5 years to make in a market that is only 15 years old, change is going to be slow. Add in the massive budgets some of these games have and risk is not something that is going to be high on the to-do list. The guy on the forums asking why don't they do this, risks nothing so sure it seems simple to fix all the problems. If he's wrong all he needs to do is stop looking at that thread and it's like it never existed. Devs have to answer for everything they do, so just winging it and trying something crazy doesn't come so easy.
That being said a themepark in a sandbox is an idea that many of the new games seem to be trying. Open worlds look like they're making a comeback With more choices it becomes more and more clear where the money is and where it isn't. Games will develop based on what your accountant tells you works, not what people say will work on a forum.
when mmos try to please everyone we end up with the mmos we currently have.
Devs need to focus on their goals and their vision... Eff the QQers, Eff the publisher's thirst for WoW's profit.
Too bad a lot of those developers dont have the funds to publish and run their own mmos. Big publishers are a plague to developers who want to make their dream mmo for their specific target audience.
This is what I needed to hear. MMORPG's are a fairly new concept in gaming and it's only with WoW that we had the genre open up to the mainstream. However I still think there are better ways to push change than spending the effort in creating a whole game from scratch for each new mechanic devs want to try out. I get the feeling that there isn't very much efficiency going on, how much do devs really reach out to the player base? of course like you said, I'm just a guy in a forum with no risk but that is why we are discussing these concepts and not part of a development team.
Why isn't there world peace, and never will be untill 1 human is left over?
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
WoW managed this.. While it didnt please everyone. Almost everyone gave it a good go. And for far longer than they tried other games they decided they didnt like afterall.
It is my 4th most played MMO. And while it is far behind my most played MMOs it also far ahead of number 5.
But there was not much in WoW I could love. Everything that caught my interest was just done wrong.. It was done very well.. but wrong for me. So it was inevitable that it wouldnt last for me. And I dont miss it one bit.
Because different people want mutually contradictory things. Some people want a game to be very grindy, while others hate grinding and won't play a game that forces you to grind much. An intermediate amount of grinding is likely to chase away both players, not attract them both.
The question is kind of like asking why someone can't come up with an abortion policy that everyone all across the political spectrum supports.
Has any automobile ever held 100 percent of the market share? (The first one did, until the second one came along).
Consumers are different from other consumers.
You're trying to sneak up on "how can one brand dominate an entire industry so thoroughly", while (almost certainly) reading this message on one of billions of PC clones running Windows ...
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
It's like chocolate ice cream.
It would be difficult to find someone who didn't like it - but there are lactose intolerant people and vegans who still can't consume it.
No matter how broad the appeal, no matter how deep the game play - guaranteed there will be someone for some reason who legitimately has a reason not to like something.
LOL
As always you've struck gold.. but the OP just wanted to bury his cat. XD
Of course I know that not every single person to ever love an MMO is going to play one game with one guild on one server with one raid that is the most perfect MMO ever....(yes i exaggerated) That is not my point.
Using your clever car metaphor....the answer to your question is no, but that isnt what I was asking in the first place. It is more like lets examine the best selling cars of ALL TIME. Toyota Corolla, VW Golf and Beetle, Honda Civic and Escort. Notice how these cars are all mid size sedans (except beetle). These are the cars that have tried to market to the majority of people and not a "niche" driver. These company's did research to find out what the majority wants. This is all I am saying could be done to MMO's. Instead of wasting 5 years and millions of dollars to squeeze money out of one crowd, why not talk to the players and find out common interests and desires so that they can spend their 5 years and millions of dollars pleasing the most amount of people so that their time and money aren't wasted. Surely players from opposite sides of the spectrum are willing to pay for a game in which half of the features really appeal to them, even if the other half sound "meh." As long as those features don't get in the way from enjoying the features they love, you're telling me that can't be done? WoW seemed to nail it, they only reason wow clones are failing is because they are emulating game mechanics and not the conceptual side.
and before you comment on what you think the majority of players want based on the current trend, It was Steve Jobs that said "It's really hard to design products by focus groups. A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them." How many people were screaming out for a device to hold one thousand songs before it was given to them?
the genre can easily do so
when one specific game attempts to do so it alienates certain people by attracting certain other people. lfd is one of those things for me. certain people won't play a game without lfd. On the other hand lfd is often the straw that breaks the camel's back for me.
one game can't please everyone. that being said the vast majority seem to prefer what I have come to loathe .. so .. its unlikely they will please me anyway, because it is probably in their best interest not to.
LFD tools are great for cramming people into content, but quality > quantity.
I am, usually on the sandbox .. more "hardcore" side of things, but I also do just want to have fun. So lighten up already
Many things are binaries...yes OR no...like politics... some people like chocolate , some people like peanut butter and some people like both, some people like neither, some people hate chocolate , some people hate peanut butter. By adding elements in to a game with the hopes of attracting more customers you may just alienate the existing customers as well as not attract new customers.
When MMOs can easilly be put out at relatively inexpensive cost, you'll see a lot more variation. When it costs 50 to 100 million plus, less so.
There are always compromises in design. Always. The more different approaches you have, the more likely the compromises will affect things. And affect those players who like a particular aspect.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
Some decisions are fundementally contrary ... for example, my personal bugaboo is PvP ... the only amount of PvP I can enjoy is zero. So obviously it's hard to make a game aiming to have me that also pleases people for whom a PvP tug-of-war over resources/territory/story is fundemental to their desired experience.
It can be done. It's not easy, And that's where the problem comes in: the time and money required to imagine and make a game where everyone feels like they are getting a complete, unencumbered experience. And that's all there is to it. Like a bug list, each new round of content is going to offer new conflicts of interest that need to be fixed. No matter how much you spend, along the way, you will always be losing a few people who can't find the fun in what you can afford to provide. It's not the devs fault, it's not the players' fault ... it's just an imperfect universe muddling through as best it can.
It is however the design leads and front offices fault
There is no world where Maplestone and I can agree on a MMORPG. We want 100% completely dynamically opposite games in just about every way from what I've seen on these forums. It really takes multiple games to appeal to each of us.
I want something challenging, dynamic, with competition with others in every aspect of the game and a strong community over just about everything else. He? She? tends to want a single player RPG that can be played with friends. We are just diametrically opposed in what we look for in these games.
I love how you left off the Ford F-150 which totally goes against your mid size sedan theory....
Only the Civic has sold more NEW models with the F150 not far off its pace! However, the F150 blows away the civic and most every car for the matter in its resale.... as more F150's are resold then any other car....
UO,Shadowbane,SWG,Darkfall,MO,Wurm Online,Secretworld,GW,GW2,PotBS,LotR,Atlantica Online,WWII Online,WoT,Battlestar Galactica,Planetside2,Perpetuum,Fallen Earth,Runescape,WoW,Eve,Xsylon,Dragon Prophet, Salem
Hmm I'm not so sure that holds up your point. A lot of people buy the F-150's then turn around and sell them off haha.
If you try to have a game that does one thing, it just needs to do that one thing very well (look at League of Legends for example)/ On the other hand if your game is trying to do 10 things at once, even if it does a few of them really well it will still been seen as either a mediocrity or a failure if it doesn't nail everything it is trying to do perfectly (look at SWTOR). The phrase "Jack of all trades master of none." comes to mind.
Also some design goals would openly conflict with each other. Having both action and tab target combat (mt even sure how that would really work?) would just piss off everybody I think.
So many promising titles/franchises destroyed in the attempt to appease everyone. If KOTOR had stayed a single player story driven RPG, Beware would still be alive and at the top of that market instead the company lays in ruins and the MMO is on life support.
Niche or bust, one size fits all fits none.